Out of my system... Trump vs Paul

[revelarts]

Sorry folks I've just got to get this out of my system
feel free to ignore it or laugh but I just have to mention for the last time.... i promise. you have my word....
that if people really wanted an ANTI -establishment candidate that was a real conservative they missed the boat completely when they dissed Ron Paul.

and the sad thing is some of the complaints against Tump now, that are being defended or dismissed by his supporters they were using against Ron Paul just a few years ago.

Ron Paul is "a racist" was repeated BY REPUBLICANS, as a reason why he was "unelectable".
But calling Trump a racist is just race baiting or playing the card today.
Paul's imagined and real offenses were decades ago, not by his hand or mouth and apologized for a million times over.
Trump never apologizes, and his offenses are recent, DURING THE CAMPAIGN. As well as stories that date back decades.

Some on the right Complained that Ron Paul folks made a lot of noise at rallies and the convention and disrupted the proceeding with their loud talk.
Ron Paul supporters were considered "tacky and a bit immature... fools".
But Trumps supporters Beat up, knock down, drag out, rip up peoples signs and spit in the faces those they don't like.
whether they are loud protesters or sitting quietly.
But that's not to be mentioned seriously or excuses are made And Trump even ask if maybe the people "deserved it".

Some people tried to say that Ron Paul "paid" people to show up at rallies and polls... never proven btw... while at the same time complaining that "Paulites" were fanatics.
While Trump has been caught (http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/18/donald-trump-busted-hiring-actors-cheer-campaign-rally.html) paying actors to show up at least one event.

"He's a kook" is what some said about Paul, but could never point to anything he said that was crazy. Just things they didn't like policy wise or things they didn't know about.
But Trumps spouts all kinds of wild inconsistent hate tinged nonsense daily but somehow he's -my kind of guy- -telling it like it is- -saying things that people think-

Ron Paul served in the military. But somehow he wasn't considered pro military.
Trump never served and says those in the military who are captured are losers. and that his life in military school was more military than what many in the arms forces live.
But that's .. not to be mentioned.

Some people complained that Ron Paul was all wrong about Bush and the Iraq War which Paul never supported, and is on record voting that way. So Ron Paul is called -out of touch- and not realistic on foreign policy.
Trump says the war was wrong and lies saying he "was never for it" AND says Bush lied to get us into war.
“Obviously, the war in Iraq was a big fat mistake,” “You call it whatever you want,” “They lied.” Trump said.
But people are just "disappointed" or a little angry with those comments BUT "that won't hurt him much". and they still support him.

I could go on but those are the highlights.
one more post and i'm done here.

[revelarts]

Ron Paul was anti-establishment but more importantly for most republicans i suspect ...even though they didn't see it clearly .. he was ANTI-Obama
he is/was the ANTI-Obama.
There is almost NOTHING they agree on.

Wars:
Obama wants to phase out over time 2 of the longest wars the US has ever been in but engage in. Kill socalled "terrorist" anywhere and everywhere. and Support our friends, threaten Iran, Support government overthrows... cough.. I mean "Democracy" round the world. Surround with navy, apply Sanctions and cyber attacks and clandestine assassination against Iran,
Ron Paul wants to come home ASAP. and draw down military bases world wide.

Economy:
Obama is for the fed, for bail outs of banks, loans to big biz, for government intervention in the economy, is a big banks puppet. Wants in on every world trade agreement, including expanding NAFTA and the North American Trade Union. Binding international agreements on our food and food supplements,etc etc
Paul wants none of the above. And to move to free-er markets.

Abortion: Obama for. Paul Against.

War on Drugs:
Obama For.
Paul End it ASAP. make MJ legal. Pardon many Fed prisoner in for drug crimes.

Amorh Climate Change:
Obama, Believe it. Tax and punish to save the earth. sign and implement every international enviro treaty there is. And continue bureaucratic implementation of agenda 21.
Paul, The sky is not Falling , Climates been changing before we got here, NO tax and Punish but we shouldn't pollute lets stop Oil Subsidies to give alternatives a fair chance though. Don't sign every international enviro treaty there is and Stop bureaucratic implementation of agenda 21.

Health Care:
Obama, Take care of Big Pharma and Big Insurance companies, force people to buy insurance and Big pharma stlye and brand meds. For that payoff to the big boys, they have to throw a bone to the poor to give them service by doing what they think is best for them. Doctors can't choose but boards of Ins and pharma executives (not death panels) will decide what care the poor Need.
Paul, Repeal government Health care. No government deals with Ins and pharma. Health care is to expensive because it's subsidized and over regulated.

Federal Reserve:
Obama, For it.
Paul, Against it.

taxes:
Obama more taxes
Paul Less taxes

Size of Governement:
Obama, we need a bigger government to take care of people.
Paul, Cut 5 depts ASAP, reduce the size of government drastically.

Immigration:
Obama For illegal amnesty and Not protecting boarders.
Paul for protection boarders and Legal immigration.

Patriot Act:
Obama for it
Paul against it

TSA:
Obama For it
Paul Against it

Constitutional powers of the prez:
Obama Prez and declare war without congress as long as he talks to the un or nato, see Libya. Prez can kill anybody anywhere if he thinks it's a good idea for the country. Createe more excutive orders giving more power to prez and his depts.
Paul
all of the above is illegal, the scope of the prez powers are clearly outline in the constitution. would have Repealed 100's of executive orders.

the bill of rights:
1st Amendment- free speech, religion
Obama, Against -see whistle blowers in jail, taking down websites, internet legislation etc
Paul, Pro freedom of speech

2nd Amendment -bear arms
Obama Against gun rights
Paul For Gun Rights

4rd Amendment - Probable cause, warrants, search
Obama DOES NOT BELIEVE that a person has a right not to have their persons, houses, papers, effects, searched without warrant. he believes in warrantless wiretaps, letters not warrants to get personal info from biz. Spying on all phone conversations via NSA and private companies. tracking internet use. etc etc.
Paul believes what Bush and Obama have done in the name of Homeland security is illegal concerning the 4nd Amendment.

5th amendment -Due process
Obama does not give a crap about the 5th. he's imprisoned without trails and thinks it's OK to even kill Americans without 5th Amendment "due process".
Paul thinks Obama's actions are illegal. and fully supports the 5th Amendment.

6th Amendment - speedy fair trails
Obama, see above. also how's Bradly Manning doing, after "not" being tortured?
Paul thinks Obama's actions are illegal and fully supports all of the 6th Amendment guarantees.

7th amendment - trails
Obama see 2 previous Amendments
Paul see 2 previous amendments

8th Amendment -cruel and unusual punishment
Obama, see Bradly Manning, Read about Bagram airbase. Torture stopped? hmm? Extraordinary renditions to torture countries stopped? nope.
Paul All the above is Illegal. supports the 8th Amendment.

9th and 10th Amendments -fed limits vs states and people rights
Obama feds can do whatever it wants. Health care etc not in constitution? ... so what.
Paul Much of what the feds do now is outside of it's constitutional jurisdiction and those activities should be returned to the the states or the people.


that's pretty much off the top of my head I'm sure I've missed many others
the basic premise is Obama Believes Government should be the daddy and mamma of the people and the prez should have nearly kingly powers, Paul believes the government is a servant, mainly established to protect our freedoms and should be small and accountable.

Ron Paul is/was the Anti-Obama.

Go down this list, how many of these points does Trump agree with Obama on? if you can even find out what his views really are ...today.

[NightTrain]

It was his foreign policy that I didn't like.

You just can't go turtle anymore. Things go to hell when we do.

[Black Diamond]

Ron Paul would have pulled out of Iraq same as Obama. We would have ISIS to deal with same as now had he been elected in 2012

[Black Diamond]

With regard to Israel, Paul would have pulled completely out of the Iran talks as opposed to brokering the deal and taking Iran's side. I don't know if there would have been a difference in the end..

[Black Diamond]

I do believe Ron Paul that he is indeed pro life. I didn't believe Romney when he said he had a change of heart. His change of heart was "I can't win the nomination and be pro choice at the same time". I am a bit worried about Trump and what kind of judges he would put on the Court, which is really where this subject is decided.

[revelarts]

Ron Paul would have pulled out of Iraq same as Obama. We would have ISIS to deal with same as now had he been elected in 2012

Possibly . But i do wonder if Ron Paul would have left all of our equipment there for Isis to use.
And he would not have invaded Libya. so no Isis in control there.
And he would not have supported the Syrian Rebels against Assad so Syria would not be filled with Isis now either.
so overall LESS Isis.

[Black Diamond]

Possibly . But i do wonder if Ron Paul would have left all of our equipment there for Isis to use.
We would not have invaded Libya.
And would not have supported the Syrian Rebels so Syria would not be filled with Isis now either.

Overthrowing Qaddafi (SP?) And Mubarak were mistakes IMO, but probably for different reasons than Ron Paul would say.
I worry about supporting Syrian rebels as well. Replacing dictators with terrorists is not a good idea imo

[pete311]

It was his foreign policy that I didn't like.

You just can't go turtle anymore. Things go to hell when we do.

hmmm yeah charging into Iraq went well...

[Black Diamond]

hmmm yeah charging into Iraq went well...

Hmm yeah and pulling out of Iraq went better.

[revelarts]

Hmm yeah and pulling out of Iraq went better.

I do have to ask. How long do you think we should have to stay in Iraq.
How much money and men should we pour into it to keep it "stable" and Isis free at this point?

a 50,000 to 100,000 troops for 5 years... 10 years... 15 more?

what's it worth at this point?

[Black Diamond]

I do have to ask. How long do you think we should have to stay in Iraq.
How much money and men should we pour into it to keep it "stable" and Isis free at this point?

a 50,000 to 100,000 troops for 5 years... 10 years... 15 more?

what's it worth at this point?

You mean once Saddam was gone and wasn't replaced by another dictator? Probably 100 years. McCain was right, I'm afraid.

[revelarts]

You mean once Saddam was gone and wasn't replaced by another dictator? Probably 100 years. McCain was right, I'm afraid.

Yep, that's the problem.
Chenney knew that from the last Gulf war too.

And that's not what anyone really wants... except neo-con/imperialist types

[Abbey Marie]

It was his foreign policy that I didn't like.

You just can't go turtle anymore. Things go to hell when we do.


You beat me to it. One can be the wrong sort of anti-establishment for our comfort level.
Paul and Sanders, for example.

[NightTrain]

hmmm yeah charging into Iraq went well...

It did.

It was the idiot democrat pulling out leaving a vacuum that made it go to hell.

[Gunny]

I do have to ask. How long do you think we should have to stay in Iraq.
How much money and men should we pour into it to keep it "stable" and Isis free at this point?

a 50,000 to 100,000 troops for 5 years... 10 years... 15 more?

what's it worth at this point?

We're there. Until we win. Maybe it would be what it's worth if we quit screwing around and laid some WWII on their butts?

[revelarts]

You beat me to it. One can be the wrong sort of anti-establishment for our comfort level.
Paul and Sanders, for example.

I know what i my concerns about a Sanders presidency are.
But what were you concerns about Paul?
what did you imagine would happen to the U.S. negatively under what he proposed that made you feel so "uncomfortable"?

[Perianne]

Overthrowing Qaddafi (SP?) And Mubarak were mistakes IMO, but probably for different reasons than Ron Paul would say.
I worry about supporting Syrian rebels as well. Replacing dictators with terrorists is not a good idea imo

I am not sure there is a definitive spelling of his name. English has no equivalent sounds that approximate how Qaddifi's name is pronounced.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Sorry folks I've just got to get this out of my system
feel free to ignore it or laugh but I just have to mention for the last time.... i promise. you have my word....
that if people really wanted an ANTI -establishment candidate that was a real conservative they missed the boat completely when they dissed Ron Paul.

and the sad thing is some of the complaints against Tump now, that are being defended or dismissed by his supporters they were using against Ron Paul just a few years ago.

Ron Paul is "a racist" was repeated BY REPUBLICANS, as a reason why he was "unelectable".
But calling Trump a racist is just race baiting or playing the card today.
Paul's imagined and real offenses were decades ago, not by his hand or mouth and apologized for a million times over.
Trump never apologizes, and his offenses are recent, DURING THE CAMPAIGN. As well as stories that date back decades.

Some on the right Complained that Ron Paul folks made a lot of noise at rallies and the convention and disrupted the proceeding with their loud talk.
Ron Paul supporters were considered "tacky and a bit immature... fools".
But Trumps supporters Beat up, knock down, drag out, rip up peoples signs and spit in the faces those they don't like.
whether they are loud protesters or sitting quietly.
But that's not to be mentioned seriously or excuses are made And Trump even ask if maybe the people "deserved it".

Some people tried to say that Ron Paul "paid" people to show up at rallies and polls... never proven btw... while at the same time complaining that "Paulites" were fanatics.
While Trump has been caught (http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/18/donald-trump-busted-hiring-actors-cheer-campaign-rally.html) paying actors to show up at least one event.

"He's a kook" is what some said about Paul, but could never point to anything he said that was crazy. Just things they didn't like policy wise or things they didn't know about.
But Trumps spouts all kinds of wild inconsistent hate tinged nonsense daily but somehow he's -my kind of guy- -telling it like it is- -saying things that people think-

Ron Paul served in the military. But somehow he wasn't considered pro military.
Trump never served and says those in the military who are captured are losers. and that his life in military school was more military than what many in the arms forces live.
But that's .. not to be mentioned.

Some people complained that Ron Paul was all wrong about Bush and the Iraq War which Paul never supported, and is on record voting that way. So Ron Paul is called -out of touch- and not realistic on foreign policy.
Trump says the war was wrong and lies saying he "was never for it" AND says Bush lied to get us into war.
“Obviously, the war in Iraq was a big fat mistake,” “You call it whatever you want,” “They lied.” Trump said.
But people are just "disappointed" or a little angry with those comments BUT "that won't hurt him much". and they still support him.

I could go on but those are the highlights.
one more post and i'm done here.

Apples and oranges again my friend.
They do not compare like that, even when I acknowledge Paul's positives.-Tyr

[Kathianne]

I don't know that anyone brought more questions or made more observations or snarky comments about Ron Paul back then. I must be consistent though, as it seems I find myself doing the same with Trump.

I don't see the 'apples and oranges' at all. Identical? No, they are not. Similarities though are there.

Perhaps my one mistake with Ron Paul is that I thought he'd be bad for race relations-I hadn't lived through Obama then. With that said and 20/20 he would have been preferable to what we now face.

[revelarts]

I don't know that anyone brought more questions or made more observations or snarky comments about Ron Paul back then. I must be consistent though, as it seems I find myself doing the same with Trump.

I don't see the 'apples and oranges' at all. Identical? No, they are not. Similarities though are there.

Perhaps my one mistake with Ron Paul is that I thought he'd be bad for race relations-I hadn't lived through Obama then. With that said and 20/20 he would have been preferable to what we now face.

I could site the post of some here on the board but i won't (i have checked to refresh my memory).
and also in the republican party in general.
But i respect your general views on this K. I disagree but i can understand how someone might not forgive or dismiss those old indicators. It's the double standard of some in the party that bugs me.